Two Hundred Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
ArcelorMittal Coatesville
February, 2010
Key words: Rolling, Plate Mills, Boiler Plate, Two High, Three High and Four High Mills, Early Iron Industry
Introduction
Today there are 11 rolling mills in the United States that can produce approximately nine million tons of
plate per year. ArcelorMittal Coatesville, located 40 miles west of Philadelphia, in Chester County
Pennsylvania, is one of these plate mills. The Coatesville facility is the oldest continuously operated steel
mill in the country, and will celebrate its 200th anniversary on July 2, 2010.
The ArcelorMittal Coatesville plant employs 840 people and covers 950 acres that straddle the Brandywine
Creek in and around the City of Coatesville in Southeastern Pennsylvania. The plant produces carbon and
alloy plates in gauges from 3/16” to 28”, in widths from 48” to 195”, and with weights up to 60 tons. These
plates are used for construction and mining equipment, bridges, process vessels, and military applications
such as ballistic protection for surface ships, submarines and land vehicles.
The story of this mill, from its inception in the early 1800’s to its transformation into a producer of the
largest and heaviest plates available in North America, is a saga of survival, perseverance, innovation, and
vision. The achievement of a historic milestone such as a 200th anniversary warrants a look back at some of
the pioneers and their mills that allowed this journey to succeed.
The Beginning – A New Mill Is Born
In 1810 the site of today’s plant was home to a water powered saw mill. Isaac Pennock (Figure 1), a Quaker
Ironmaster, chose the location to expand his rolling and slitting business. He had previously established the
Federal Slitting Mill in 1793. His first iron works was located 4 miles south of present day Coatesville on
the Buck Run, which flows into the Brandywine Creek.
Although Pennsylvania was not the birthplace of iron making in America, by 1800
the commonwealth had become the center of the iron industry. The Keystone State
was blessed with the essential ingredients for iron making – ore deposits lying on or
close to the surface, abundant forest lands for charcoal fuel, and limestone for
furnace flux.
In 1805 the Federal Slitting Mill was one of 11 such establishments in Pennsylvania
that produced 2,750 tons per year. Chester County was home to four of these eleven
rolling and slitting mills. They could obtain forged blooms from one of eight forges
in the county1.
The Coatesville site, located where the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike
crossed the Brandywine, offered several commercial advantages. The Turnpike
Figure 1. Isaac Pennock –
Founder of Brandywine
was the first hard road built in America. Completed in 1794, it offered all weather
Iron Works and Nail
transit between the two major cities in the state. The stones used as a road surface
Factory
prevented mud and washouts during the rainy season that rendered many wagon
paths impassable. The Brandywine was also much larger than Buck Run, and its
swift waters offered the potential of greater water power to drive a rolling and slitting mill. Larger
waterways were also less sensitive to dry spells, which halted operations when the flow was insufficient to
turn the waterwheel and power the mill.
Pennock partnered with Jesse Kersey. Together they purchased a 110 acre farm from Moses Coates, the man
for whom the city of Coatesville is named, and converted the saw mill into an iron works. Locally forged
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
1
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
iron bars, produced from pig iron made in nearby cold blast furnaces, were heated on a grate over an open
charcoal fire and rolled to narrow flat stock. The rolled iron was either sold for use as wagon wheel bands,
barrel hoops, and general blacksmith use, or it was slit into rods and made into nails.2
By the time the Brandywine Iron Works and Nail Factory, as the new enterprise was called, began operations
in 1810, there were 47 rolling and slitting mills in the young nation. Spread across ten states, these
establishments converted 10,000 tons of bar iron into narrow stock and nail rods.3, 4
The American iron industry had 153 blast furnaces that made 53,908 tons of iron in 1810, and 330 forges that
produced 24,541 tons of bar iron to feed the rolling and slitting mills4. The balance of the blast furnace iron
presumably was used in the production of hollow ware, such as pots and kettles, and stove plates.
Pennsylvania led the nation with 18 rolling and slitting mills, followed by Massachusetts with 13 such
establishments. The Pennsylvania mills produced 4,502 tons.5 Six of the mills were located in Chester
County, and rolled 1,472 tons of iron valued at $158,600.5
The rolling and slitting mills of 1810 had not changed much during the previous 200 years. Although no
drawings or pictures are available of that first mill along the Brandywine, descriptions of the equipment
indicate it was similar to documented facilities. Harrison described a mill in Middleboro, Massachusetts,
which is often cited as the first rolling mill in America.6 Built in 1751, it was powered by two water wheels
– one for the top rolls of the rolling mill and the slitting mill, and the other for the bottom rolls. The layout
of the mill is shown in Figure 2.7
Peter Oliver, a Crown Judge in the Province,
built the mill. He was a native of Birmingham,
England, which was an iron producing center.
Oliver probably had either first hand knowledge
or experience of the rolling process, or was
familiar with people who could provide him
with the necessary guidance. The English
government, by an Act of Parliament in 1750,
prohibited the making, the importing, or the
operation of machinery to roll and slit iron in
the colonies.
Oliver received special
consideration to import the equipment and
operate the mill. This exemption was most
likely due to his extensive political connections,
including the influence of his brother, who was
the Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts.
The Act of 1750 restricted the activities of the
colonies to the production of pig iron, castings,
and bar iron. It was designed to keep the
colonies dependent upon England for finished
products.8
Tail
Race
Flume
Slitter
Mill
Shear
Flume
Figure 2. Middleboro, Massachusetts Rolling and Slitting Mill
To determine compliance with the Act,
Marshals were ordered to document all existing
iron manufacturers and report on their operations. One rolling and slitting mill was reported in Chester
County in 1750, operated by John Taylor.9 According to local records, the mill was built in 1746, and was
located alongside the Sarum Forge that had been established in 1742.10, 11 This mill predates the Middleboro
mill by five years. It continued to operate during the Revolutionary War. The Sarum Iron Works operated
until 1836, when the site, which became known as Glen Mills, was converted to a paper mill.12
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
2
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
Early Rolling Mills
Harnessing the energy of moving water from a stream or river provided free power, but it did have its
drawbacks. Since water flowed in one direction, a water wheel only turned in one direction. Powering two
rolls in opposite directions required either two water wheels, or a series of gears to transmit power from the
water wheel to the opposite side of the mill, where wooden gears could drive one of the rolls from the other
side.
The two water wheel option could be employed with either two wheels on one side of the mill, or a headrace
(or flume) on both sides of the mill. Problems with turn up or turn down of the rolled bars could be corrected
by adjusting the gates in the headrace, thereby
altering the speed of the water wheel and one of
the rolls.13
A typical water powered rolling mill employed
four or five simple pieces of equipment. A shear
cut the forged bars into smaller pieces, a small
furnace was used to heat the forged bars, a narrow
mill rolled the bars, and a slitting mill cut the
rolled bars into narrow rods. Occasionally a
hammer was employed to forge pig iron, to further
reduce a bar supplied by the local forge, to weld
scraps of iron together to re-roll into plate, or to
flatten a rolled plate or bar.
The Middleboro mill received hammered bars that
measured 3” x ¾” x 8’ long from Leonard’s Forge.
The bars were sheared into smaller lengths and heated
in a charcoal fueled furnace. The mill, with rolls 15”
in diameter and 36” long, rolled the ¾” thick bars
down to ¼” in four passes, which would suggest 1/8”
drafts were taken on each pass. After the last pass the
bar was passed to the slitter and cut into 5/16” wide
nail rods.14 Nail rods were usually bundled and
distributed to local craftsman who returned forged
nails. The Brandywine Iron Works and Nail Factory
presumably operated in much the same manner.
Nineteenth century rolling mills were fairly simple
pieces of equipment. Small cast iron housings were
mounted on timbers buried below floor level, and
anchored with long bolts (Figure 3).15 Power was
transmitted to the cast iron rolls from the water
wheel by a wooden shaft connected to a coupling
box (Figure 4). The rolling and slitting mills were
usually powered in series, or in a “train”, with a
shaft connecting the rolls of each stand.
Figure 5 depicts the early days inside the
Brandywine Iron Works and Nail Factory. The
drawing was commissioned in 1865 by Abram
Gibbons, a local banker who had been a partner in
the firm from 1847 to 1855.2 The engraving, used
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
Figure 3. Nineteenth century rolling mill and foundation
Figure 4. Power train of a water driven mill
Figure 5. Interior view of the Brandywine Iron Works
and Nail Factory circa 1810
3
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
on the bank’s notes, shows the mill as it would have looked before several renovations. Its historical
accuracy may be questioned, since the engraving was made more than 50 years after the building of the
original mill. It does, however, provide insight into the activities conducted inside an early 19th century
rolling mill.
The Second Generation of Ownership
Pennock and Kersey ran the Brandywine Iron Works
and Nail Factory together for more than six years.
Isaac bought his partner’s share of the business in
January of 1817. Rebecca Webb Pennock, Isaac’s
daughter, grew up near the Federal Slitting Mill and
was well versed in the operations of the mill.16 She
married Charles Lukens, a medical doctor from
Philadelphia, in 1813 (Figure 6). Dr. Lukens left
his practice and joined his father-in-law in the iron
business in 1814. He took over the operation of the
Federal Slitting Mill, and ran that establishment for
several years as he learned the iron business.
Charles and Rebecca relocated to Coatesville at the
Figure 6. Dr. Charles Lukens and his wife, Rebecca Lukens
end of 1816. Early in 1817 they leased the
operations of the Brandywine Iron Works and Nail Factory, and together they ran the mill.17
The first order of business was to improve the condition of the iron works. Initially transformed from a saw
mill, seven years of operation had rendered the iron mill in dire need of repair. The new owners found
themselves responsible for capital outlays to replace worn out equipment in addition to the $420 annual fee
for leasing the mill.
The First Boiler Plate Rolled in America
Meanwhile a new market for iron products was developing. The desire to provide better methods of
transportation between cities encouraged enterprising men such as John Fitch, Robert Fulton, Robert
Livingston, Oliver Evans and John Stevens to develop steam powered boats on the Delaware. Copper plates
were initially used to construct the boilers, but these proved to be too expensive. The first iron boilers were
made from plate not rolled in this country, but imported from England.18 Dr. Lukens saw this new
development as an opportunity to expand his business into the boiler plate market. He modified his mill, and
in 1818 produced the first boiler plate rolled in America. Charcoal blooms weighing less than 100 pounds
were heated in a small furnace on a grate over an open fire, transferred by hand to the mill, and rolled to a
thickness of ¼” or 3/16”.19
Although the exact size of the mill is not known, it was said to have “rolls of about 16” in diameter and from
three feet to four feet in length between the housings.” 20 This width appears to be confirmed by another
notable order received in 1825. John Elgar of York, Pennsylvania, ordered plates 1/12” (0.0833”) thick and
23”, 24” and 25” wide - clearly requiring a mill of 30” in width or wider. The plates were used to build the
Codorus, the first iron hulled ship constructed in America. The use of the iron plates were designed to
protect the hull from the shallow and rocky waters of the Susquehanna River. Despite the fact that the plate
market was still in its infancy, even these early customers had their concerns for quality. Elgar specified that
the plates should be “particularly clear of buckles or bilges that prevent the sheet from lying flat.” 21
The future of the prospering mill was dealt a severe blow later that year when Dr. Lukens suddenly
succumbed to a fever and died in June of 1825, at the age of 39. From his deathbed he was able to secure a
promise from his wife to continue their struggle to maintain the iron business. Rebecca agreed, and in doing
so became the first woman industrial leader in America. 22
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
4
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
Rebecca Lukens made major improvements to her Brandywine Iron Works in 1834. She invested heavily to
upgrade the equipment, and virtually rebuilt her entire mill. A new dam across the Brandywine was added to
provide a better source of power. A higher dam, with a larger reservoir, meant a greater fall, or head, to
drive the mill. In addition to more power, the larger reservoir provided more storage capacity for summer
dry spells. The new mill equipment included castings, wheels, and furnaces. The building that housed the
mill was enlarged, and several tenement houses were built for the mill workers. It appears that the mill may
have been widened to 48” during this renovation.
As the little rolling and slitting mill on the Brandywine approached its 25th year of operation, a major event
occurred that led to significant changes in its future. The Philadelphia and Columbia Railroad was
completed in 1834, connecting the largest city in Pennsylvania to the banks of the Susquehanna River
seventy five miles to the west. It crossed the gorge near Coatesville, through which the Brandywine flowed,
at a point less than a ½ mile from Rebecca’s mill. The railroad presented opportunities to reduce the cost of
bringing raw materials such as forged bars and coal to the mill, replacing the long and arduous journey by
pack mules or wagons over rough trails. It also opened a relatively inexpensive avenue to the large and
growing Philadelphia boiler plate market.
Local Competition - The Second Twenty Five Years
Following the success of Pennock’s two early enterprises – The Federal Slitting Mill and the Brandywine
Iron Works and Nail Factory – a local forge built a water powered rolling mill. Laurel Forge, located on the
Buck Run where it flows into the Brandywine Creek, about four miles downstream from the Federal Slitting
Mill, added a rolling mill in 1825.
The sustained success of Rebecca Lukens, the completion of the Philadelphia and Columbia Railroad, and
the blossoming boiler plate market created by the rapid growth of steamships, railroads and steam
locomotives led others to follow suite and build additional rolling mills in the area.
Samuel Hatfield owned a grist mill on the Brandywine about three miles upstream from the Brandywine Iron
Works. He added a rolling mill in 1836 and built a second mill on the opposite side of the stream in 1843.
His mills were known as the West Brandywine Iron Works.23 Hibernia Forge, located on the Brandywine
less than a mile upstream from Hatfield’s mill, built a rolling mill in 1837.
Isaac Pennock’s widow, Martha Webb Pennock, continued her husband’s iron business after his death in
1824. Initially she rebuilt the Federal Slitting Mill, which became known as the Rokeby Rolling Mill. She
erected a new rolling mill along the Brandywine in 1837, two miles below Hatfield’s mills, and one mile
above the original Coatesville mill, which was now operated by her daughter, Rebecca Lukens. Martha’s
mill, known as the Caln Iron Works, was built on land that was originally owned by her husband, and that
she acquired in the settlement of his estate. It is said that Martha built the mill for her son, George W.
Pennock, and her son-in-law, Dr. Jesse Coates, to operate, but it appears that the mill was leased and
operated by others.24
In 1838 two brothers, James and John Forsythe, and their brother-in-law, John Yearsley, built a rolling mill
alongside the Philadelphia and Columbia Railroad Bridge that spanned the Brandywine. The mill was
named Triadelphia Iron Works, or “Three Brothers,” reflecting their Quaker heritage.25
Information gathered by the Census of 1840 indicated that there were 169 rolling mills, bloomeries, and
forges in Pennsylvania. The Iron and Coal Association of the State of Pennsylvania procured returns with
production information for 1841 from 30 rolling mills in March of 1842. The data from the report, listed in
Table I, show that the Federal Slitting Mill, now known as Rokeby, the Brandywine Iron Works, the West
Brandywine Iron Works, Hibernia Forge and Triadelphia each produced 400 tons of boiler plate per year.
The Caln Iron Works and Laurel Forge each made 200 tons of sheet iron per year. The two forges, Hibernia
and Laurel, each also made 300 tons of bar iron annually, the Brandywine Iron Works produced 100 tons of
nails, and Laurel made 60 tons of nails.26
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
5
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
Each of the rolling mills employed between ten and twelve men, indicating that the establishments were quite
similar in the manning of their operations, but not in their productivity. The tons of plate produced annually
per man varied from a high of 40 to a low of nearly 17, and averaged 30.4 tons per man per year. In
addition, Hibernia employed another 17 men in the forge, Laurel had 16 additional hands involved in the
forge and nail making, and the Brandywine Iron Works also had 6 men in their nail operation. The
productivity of these operations averaged 19.5 tons per year per man, reflecting the lower productivity
typically associated with a forge.
Table I. Rolling Mill Data 1841
Iron and Coal Association of the State of Pennsylvania
Mill
Established
Tons
Product
# of Men
Tons/Man
Rokeby
1793
400
Boiler Plate
11
36.4
Brandywine
1810
400
100
Boiler Plate
Nails
11
6
36.4
Laurel
1825
200
300
60
Sheet Iron
Bar Iron
Nails
12
16
16.7
18.8
West Brandywine
1836
400
Boiler Plate
11
36.4
Hibernia
1837
400
300
Boiler Plate
Bar Iron
10
17
40.0
17.7
Caln
1837
200
Sheet Iron
12
16.7
Triadelphia
1838
400
Boiler Plate
12
33.3
Total Boiler Plate and Sheet Iron
2,400
Employees
79
Avg = 30.4
Total Bar and Nails
760
Employees
39
Avg = 19.5
Total Product
3,160
Total Employees
118
Avg = 26.8
Since the division of labor between plate, bars and nails is unclear, these productivity figures may not be
exact. However, if the total production of plate, bar and nails (3,160 tons) is divided by the total reported
employment (118 men), a productivity of 26.8 tons of annual product per man is obtained. Mason’s Nail
Factory, also located in Coatesville, employed 42 men and produced 1,000 tons of nails. It is likely that they
consumed a considerable portion of the sheet iron produced in the local mills.26
In 1846 the partnership that had formed the Triadelphia Iron Works was dissolved. Two of the owners, John
and James Forsythe, withdrew and established the Thorndale Iron Works in 1847. Their new mill was
located along the tracks of the Philadelphia and Columbia Railroad, two miles east of Coatesville. This was
the first area rolling mill that was not built along water’s edge. The selected site reflected the growing
importance of rail transportation. The rolling mill was powered by a steam engine rather than a water wheel,
and represented the introduction of this new rolling technology to the area.
Steam power eliminated the mill’s dependency on a source of moving water to drive the rolls. It extended
the time available for production, since it was immune to the winter freezes that not only halted rolling but
could also damage the water wheels. Steam power was also insensitive to summer droughts that reduced the
flow of water enough to halt the wheels and stop the rolling operations. The more consistent power produced
by steam engines helped to prevent damage to the mill rolls. Low water flow could cause a bar to become
stuck in the rolls before the completion of a rolling pass, resulting in heat cracking of the iron rolls. During
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
6
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
periods of low water flow the mill hands would be ready to climb on the water wheel to prevent a stalled
piece, or “sticker”. Their added weight allowed the wheel to continue turning, complete the pass, and
prevent the iron rolls from cracking.27 A mill location away from moving water also eliminated the
possibility of damage to the mill dam, the mill race, and the waterwheel caused by spring and fall floods.
The cluster of rolling mills around Coatesville reflected the advantages the location had to offer. Power was
supplied by the Brandywine. The Philadelphia and Columbia Railroad afforded reliable transportation to
distant markets, while the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike provided a local avenue of transportation.
The connection between the local mills and the distant markets was made possible by independent sales
agents. These agents worked on a commission basis, usually about five percent of the selling price, and often
represented more than one rolling mill in their region.28 The commission agents visited the local shops and
manufacturing plants in their area, took orders, transmitted them to the mill, collected payment after delivery
of the plates, and forwarded the revenue to the mill. They also provided valuable information on market
conditions, recommended pricing strategies, and relayed news concerning advancements in iron making and
rolling technology.
A meeting of Ironmasters was convened in Philadelphia in 1850 to discuss the concerns of the industry –
mainly the subject of tariffs. Documents issued from that meeting provide another snapshot of the mills in
and around Coatesville for the year 1849. The information for the rolling mills in the vicinity of Coatesville
is shown in Table II.
Table II. Rolling Mill Data 1849
Documents Relating to the Manufacture of Iron
Mill
Built
# of
Roll
Trains
# of
Puddling
Furnaces
# of
Heating
Furnaces
Tons
Product
# of
Men
Tons/Man
Rokeby
1793
1
0
3
875
Boiler and
Flue Plate
22
39.8
Brandywine
1810
1
0
2
944
Boiler and
Flue Plate
17
55.5
Laurel
1825
1
1
2
854
Boiler and
Flue Plate
18
47.4
West
Brandywine
1836
2
0
4
1,000
Boiler and
Flue Plate
30
33.3
Hibernia
1837
1
0
2
450
Boiler and
Flue Plate
16
28.1
Caln
1837
2
2
3
800
600
Boiler and
Flue Plate
Bar
42
33.3
Triadelphia
1838
2
1
2
550
Boiler and
Flue Plate
20
27.5
Thorndale
1847
1
2
4
725
Boiler and
Flue Plate
32
22.7
6,073
Employees
197
Avg = 34.5
Total Tons
Production at the local mills had increased significantly in the eight years since 1841. The total output of the
eight mills was almost 6,100 tons per year, up from 2,400 tons from the seven mills in 1841. Hatfield’s West
Brandywine Iron Works had added a second rolling mill in 1843 and produced 1,000 tons of boiler and flue
plate per year with 30 men. The Caln Iron Works had added a bar mill, and with 42 men annually made 800
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
7
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
tons of boiler plate and 600 tons of bars. The Triadelphia mill also had added a second train of rolls and
produced 550 tons of boiler and flue plate per year with 20 men. The Brandywine Iron Works produced 944
tons annually with 17 men and a single rolling mill. The Laurel Iron Works was close behind with 854 tons.
The steam mill at Thorndale produced 725 tons with 32 hands. Hibernia Forge lagged the group with only
450 tons and 16 employees. The Rokeby mill had fallen on hard times and was sold at a sheriff’s sale in
1849. It returned to operation with 22 workers and a capacity of 875 tons.
Four of the mills had also added puddling furnaces, with Laurel and Triadelphia each installing one, and Caln
and Thorndale having two each. Puddling furnaces, the forerunner of the open hearth furnace, allowed
blooms to be made from iron ore without completely melting the ore. The temperature of the ore was raised
in the furnace until most of the impurities were driven off, leaving a pasty mass. The puddle ball was
removed from the furnace and the liquid slag was either driven out of the pasty mass by hammering,
squeezing, or rolling. The rolled bars, called muck bars, were often broken into pieces and remelted to
further refine the iron. Muck bars were rolled into flue plate, but were not considered high enough quality to
use for boiler plate. Charcoal blooms produced at the forge were the feedstock for high quality boiler plate.29
A New Generation Assumes Control
Rebecca Lukens retired from active management of the mill and became a silent partner in 1847.30 The
operation of the mill was carried on first by Rebecca’s son-in law, Abram Gibbons, who entered the business
in 1842. Gibbons was joined in 1847 by another son-in-law, Dr. Charles Huston.
Dr. Huston made the last renovation to the original mill layout in 1853. He installed a new breast wheel with
gearing designed to convey more power to the mill’s rolls. A heavy flywheel was also installed so that
power could be stored and used to minimize the fluctuations inherent to water power. Any variation in the
flow of water was almost immediately reflected in the movement of the rolls.31 The new water wheel
gearing combined with the large flywheel allowed the mill to be enlarged to 66” wide with rolls 21” in
diameter. Additional improvements were made to the heating capacity, replacing one of the existing
furnaces with a new one.
Rebecca Webb Pennock Lukens passed away the following year, on December 10, 1854, leaving the
ownership of her mill to her heirs. After her death, the name of the iron works was changed to the Lukens
Rolling Mill in her honor.
Maintenance and quality problems presented challenges to the early rolling mills just as they do today.
Broken rolls could be replaced in a few hours. Failure of the power train could shut the mill down for longer
periods. The summer and fall of 1856 proved to be particularly troublesome. A water wheel shaft broke in
September, and a roll housing cracked in November, causing significant down time. These delays, coupled
with limited production resulting from low water problems in July, August, and October through December,
caused their selling agents to voice serious concerns. Customer complaints about quality issues such as poor
mechanical properties, flatness defects, and dimensional errors were also familiar to the mill. Methods to
achieve consistent plate properties were the result of trial and error. Variations in raw materials – the blooms
purchased from local forges – as well as in heating and rolling practices combined to generated inconsistent
results. Once a successful process was identified for a combination of blooms and practices, every attempt
was made to follow the same recipe for each plate.
The water powered rolling mills were non-reversing mills – they could only roll in one direction. The iron
sheets had to be passed back over the top of the mill for each subsequent pass. This practice resulted in
significant temperature losses, particularly in light gauge plates. The high rate of cooling on iron sheets less
than ¼” thick caused temperature variations that resulted in the sheet buckling, and was usually accompanied
by customer complaints.32
Improvements in workmanship generated enough confidence for the owners to issue a warranty with their
products starting in March, 1857.32 The warranty guaranteed boiler plates to be free from manufacturing
defects. Any plate found to have a defect could be returned for a refund or replacement.
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
8
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
The Civil War Brings Expansion and Growth
The years during the Civil War were prosperous ones for the local mills. Every mill grew in size as a result
of the increased demand for iron sheet and boiler plate. Employment at the Lukens Iron Works doubled from
17 workers in 1850 to 34 during the war years of 1861 to 1864.33 Plate production, which seldom exceeded
100 tons per month through the 1850’s, broke the 1,000 ton barrier for the first time in 1862, and peaked at
just over 1,700 tons in 1864. The mill weathered an economic slowdown following the war, and Lukens’
output never again fell below 1,000 tons per year. 34
Although significant production increases had been realized, the size of the Lukens mill and the method of
production remained relatively unchanged from the time of the renovations in 1853 to the end of the 1860’s.
Despite improvements made in other local mills, including the installation of wider rolling mills, and
additional mills, Dr. Huston resisted the recommendations of his selling agents to widen his mills.
The recovering economy of the late 1860’s resulted in increased demand and finally convinced Dr. Huston to
expand the iron works. The local economy was also bolstered by the construction of the Wilmington and
Northern Railroad. This north-south rail line, headquartered in Coatesville, opened the Wilmington to
Coatesville portion in 1869 and was extended to Reading in 1872. The new rail link brought coal used for
fuel from the mines of central Pennsylvania and ore from the Wilmington docks to the local iron mills. It
was also used to deliver plates to the growing ship building industry in Wilmington and other shipyards
along the Delaware.
Lukens Enters the Steam Era
Lukens had stayed with its original style water powered mill long after the local competition had progressed
to steam. Their selling agents encouraged them from time to time to upgrade to a wider mill and newer
technology when an order was lost because the desired plate widths could not be rolled. In the 1850’s
Lukens occasionally had wider plates rolled for them by other Coatesville mills – Valley (formerly Caln) and
Viaduct (formerly Triadelphia).35 With business recovering after the post war slump, and financed by the
wartime profits, Dr. Huston and his business partner, Charles Penrose, began to investigate improvements to
their mill. The building that housed the original mill was not suited for expansion, and construction of a new
building was required. All possibilities were examined for the new undertaking during 1868 and 1869,
including reversing steam engines and three high mills up to 96” wide. After the lengthy investigation, a
rather conservative solution was chosen. A new steam driven 84” two high non-reversing plate mill, with
chilled iron rolls 25” in diameter, was installed in 1870 and put into operation in November. It was housed
in a new double bay mill building adjacent to the original mill.
The new wider mill allowed Lukens to enter the market for wide boat iron. This was a growing market in
Philadelphia and nearby Wilmington, where the ship yards were building an increasing number of iron
skinned vessels. The traditional shipbuilding centers of Boston and New York were giving way to facilities
on the Delaware River – in Philadelphia, Chester and Wilmington - cities closer to the rolling mills that
supplied the iron plates.36
The first order for “boat iron” plate was received in February, 1870, and produced on the old mill. The
selling price for boat iron was lower than that of boiler plate, and a lower grade of iron could be used. After
the installation of the steam mill, a puddle furnace was installed in the original mill building, and for the first
time in its history the company had its own source of iron to feed the mills. Although several of the local
mills had been operating puddling furnaces for a number of years, puddled iron had not been used at Lukens
for the production of boiler plate because it was considered inferior to forged iron. It was, however, well
suited for boat iron, and Lukens entered the era of iron production.
Iron was heated in a reverberatory furnace and entered the mill on short roller tables, generally 50 to 70 feet
long. After rolling to gauge, the plates were removed from the tables, piled, cooled and sheared. Distortion
in the plates caused by uneven cooling was removed by a tilt hammer, which had the disadvantage of leaving
unsightly hammer marks that damaged the surface.
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
9
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
As steel became more popular, the iron works experienced broken rolls in the 84” mill due to its higher
strength. An 84” three high finishing stand was installed in 1880 next to the two high mill, and was driven
by the same steam engine (Figure 7). The three high mill was invented in 1857 at the rail mill of the
Cambria Iron Works in Johnstown by John Fritz. A gifted engineer of legendary proportion, Fritz was born
in 1822 less than 10 miles from the Brandywine Iron Works in Londonderry Township, Chester County.37
Figure 7. The Steam Driven 84” Two High Mill (on left) and 84” Three High Mill (on right). Note the large flywheel on far right.
After the installation of the three high, the two high mill was used as a breakdown mill to rough the slab
while it was still hot and relatively soft. A transfer table moved the piece over to the new three high mill,
where the plate was finished to the ordered thickness. The greater stiffness of the three high mill allowed the
plate to reach the final gauge before it lost valuable temperature. The gauge uniformity of the finished plate
was also improved, since the roll wear was divided between the roughing mill and the finishing mill.38 Since
the same engine powered both mills, only one mill at a time could roll a plate. While one mill was in
operation, the other sat idle, waiting for its turn to roll. However, the greater speed resulting from rolling in
both directions on the three high finishing mill without reversing the steam engine increased the mill’s
capacity from 6,000 tons per year to 11,000 tons. 39, 40
Three developments combined in the last two decades of the 19th century to change the rolling mill landscape
along the Brandywine. The first trend was a growing demand for steel boiler plate that was reducing the
market for iron plate. The second was an emerging preference for wider plates by boiler makers, who could
reduce the number of riveted seams required to fabricate a vessel if wider plates were available. The rivets
used to secure a seam could create a weak point and become a potential source of failure in a boiler. The
preparation of the holes to accept the rivets and the actual process of riveting the seams also increased the
amount of labor required to fabricate a boiler.
Some of the older, narrow, water powered rolling mills could not make the transition to rolling wider steel
plates and were eventually abandoned. Isaac Pennock’s original enterprise, the Federal Slitting Mill, was
destroyed by fire in May 1865.41 The rolling mills at Hibernia, Hatfield and Laurel, financially weakened by
the Panic of 1873, were abandoned in the late 1870’s and early 1880’s. The Thorndale Iron works managed
to hold on until 1893, but then it too fell victim to the changing times. Meanwhile, the success of the
stronger mills was reflected in the rise in the number of men employed. In 1881 the Valley Iron Works
(formerly called the Caln Iron Works), with four trains of rolls, employed 200 men, the Viaduct had 150
hands tending their four roll trains, 100 men worked at the Lukens mill, with two trains of rolls – the muck
rolls and the 84” mill with two stands, and Thorndale employed between 80 and 90 men. 42
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
10
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
The third major development in the local industry was the emergence of the Worth brothers in the 1880’s.
They were the sons of a well known iron master, Sheshbazzar B. Worth, who ran two of the local rolling
mills with his partner Hugh E. Steele. John Sharpless Worth and William Penn Worth established the
Brandywine Rolling Mill in 1881. The new mill was put into operation in February 1882 with two trains of
rolls – one set of 20” muck rolls for making bars 4”x6”, and one 90” wide plate train with 28” diameter
rolls.40 They also had three double puddling furnaces for making puddled iron for muck bars, which were
then used to roll plates. The Brandywine Rolling Mill started up with an annual capacity of 4,000 tons, but
quickly grew to 6,000 tons by 1884.43
By 1890 the capacity of the five active mills remaining in Coatesville had increased by almost 50% from
their 1880 output. The Viaduct Rolling Mill was producing 15,000 tons per year with four rolling mills. The
Worth Brothers could produce 12,000 tons with their single 90” wide mill at the Brandywine Rolling Mills.
Lukens had a capacity of 11,000 tons with its two high and three high roll train. The Valley Iron Works was
rebuilt in 1888 and was operating two 72” wide mills, a 96” wide and a 110” mill, with a total capacity of
11,000 tons per year. The Thorndale mill, struggling to survive in the changing market, remained at a
capacity of 4,000 tons per year, unchanged since 1880.44
The Lukens Rolling Mill was poised to make bold changes that would propel the works past the other local
mills. The firm was incorporated in 1890 as the Lukens Iron & Steel Company with Dr. Huston as President,
and his two sons, Abraham. F. Huston and Charles L. Huston, running the company. Infused with new
capital and ideas, a plan for growth was initiated that would take the company to the forefront of the plate
industry.
The Largest Plate Mill in the United States
Construction of a new three high mill, designed to meet the demand for longer and wider plates, had started
in 1889. The mill was built as an addition to the 84” mill, not as a replacement. The new Birdsboro mill had
chilled iron rolls 34” in diameter and 120” long, and
was the largest plate mill in the United States
(Figure 8). The new mill was driven by a large
Corliss steam engine and was equipped with
automatic hydraulic lifting tables. It rolled its first
plate on July 2, 1890 – on the 80th anniversary of the
company’s founding.45
The 120” mill was served by a hydraulic crane,
which allowed a single man to draw ingots from the
heating furnaces, set them on the feed tables, and
deliver them to the mill. Heating was provided by
three gas furnaces with hearths 28 feet by 7 feet and
one 3-hole gas pit furnace. The finishing equipment
included mechanical transfer cooling beds complete
with hydraulic lifts for inspection of the bottom
surfaces of plates. This new method of cooling on
tables, rather than in piles, prevented the distortion
often seen in the plates that was caused by uneven
cooling, and resulted in much flatter plates. The
plates were next transferred by mechanical devices
to either large hydraulic or steam shears for
trimming to the ordered size.
Figure 8. 120” Three High Birdsboro Mill Built in 1890
The new mill had a capacity of 40,000 tons per year, far outpacing any of the other Coatesville mills. With
the added capacity, Lukens’ share of plate production along the Brandywine jumped from 20% to over 50%.
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
11
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
The installation of two 30 ton open hearth furnaces was completed in early 1892, and the first heat of steel
produced in Coatesville was tapped on February 25, 1892. Lukens now had a source of steel ingots to feed
the growing appetite of its hungry mills.
A Period of Rapid Expansion
Construction was started in
1899 on a 48 inch universal
mill (Figure 9). The new
three high steam powered mill
was put into operation in
May, 1900. In addition to the
three horizontal rolls (28”
diameter top and bottom rolls,
21” middle), it had four 17 ½”
diameter vertical edging rolls
which rolled the plate edges to
a uniform width along the
Figure 9. 48” Universal Plate Mill with Moveable Roller Leveler in the Offline Position.
entire length. These plates
were ideal for use in the fabrication of long beams for bridges and buildings.
The universal mill was housed in a “U” shaped building that was 400 feet long. One leg of the building
contained four horizontal gas heating furnaces. The small ingots rolled on the mill were handled with an
electric charging and drawing crane. Ingots were delivered on roller tables to the mill, which was located in
the center portion of the three buildings. Here the ingots were rolled on the reversing mill to plates ranging
in size from 1/8” to ¼” thick, 8” to 42” wide, and up to 100 feet long. The plates left the mill on the last pass
and were flattened by a 9 roll leveler. The leveler was designed with the bottom rolls in the table line. The
top frame was positioned off line until the last pass, so as not to interfere with the rolling process. Charles L.
Huston received a patent in 1902 for his unique leveler design. The 130 foot wide building also contained a
long runout table which transported the plates from the mill to a large cooling bed equipped with a
mechanical transfer mechanism. After cooling, the plates were moved onto another set of roller tables, and
delivered to the electric powered shears for cutting to length. The rolled edges of universal plates allowed
them to be used without shearing. The finished plate dropped from the shears onto yet another set of roller
tables located at one end of the shipping building. The shipping bay was the third building in the universal
mill complex. The plates were weighed before they were moved by a large overhead electric crane equipped
with several trolleys. The multiple trolleys were designed to handle the 100’ long plates without bending or
dropping them.47 Often the plates were loaded directly onto rail cars for shipment.
Although narrow in size, the new universal mill was extremely productive, and had an annual capacity of
75,000 tons. The extreme length of the universal plates precluded the manual handling typically used in
plate mills. The mill was designed to allow mechanical devices to load and remove ingots at the heating
furnaces, place them onto tables, and continuously move them through the rolling, cooling and shearing
process until they were ready for shipping. This design set the stage for the layout of the larger plate mills
that would be built at Lukens in the future – mills constructed to meet the growing demand for thicker, wider
and longer plates for boilers and shipbuilding.
Lukens entered the new century as one of the premier makers of plate steel in the country. For most of the
19th century it had remained unremarkable as a member of a group of small Coatesville rolling mills
producing similar products for the same markets. The most remarkable accomplishment was its ability to
avoid financial trouble throughout the periodic recessions and economic downturns that created ownership
changes and eventual closure of all but one of the other mills. Lukens emerged from the 19th century as the
leader in the plate market.
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
12
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
The New Century Brings New Mills
A large slabbing mill was built in 1901 and put into operation on December 23 of that year. It had rolls 34”
in diameter and 108” long and reportedly was the largest slabbing mill in the country.47 Ingots from the open
hearth shops were heated in 4 soaking pits, each having 3 holes. The bottom poured ingots were rolled to
slabs that ranged in size from massive pieces over 100” long, measuring 50” x 18” and weighing 30,000
pounds, down to 4”x4” billets. Slabbing mills were used to prepare material for rolling on the finishing
mills. Usually a manipulator was used to turn the ingots on their side so that all four sides could be rolled.
Slabbing the ingots in a separate operation reduced the work necessary on the finishing mill, and increased
total output of the plant. Slabbing also reduced the number of different ingot sizes needed to accommodate
the range of finished plate sizes. The capacity of the slabbing mill was 300,000 tons per year, although the
melting capacity of the plant was far less.
The Largest Plate Mill in the United States (Again)
The 120” three high mill was the largest plate mill in the United States when it was built in 1890. However,
in 1896 the Worth Brothers’ Brandywine Rolling Mills, located adjacent to the Lukens facility, installed a
three high mill that was 132 inches wide. Their new mill, with 36” diameter rolls, was now recognized as the
country’s largest, and had an annual capacity of 40,000 tons of plates. The Huston brothers reacted to this
development by widening the 120” mill in late 1900. The 34” diameter rolls were replaced by larger rolls,
36” in diameter with a length of 134” – 2” wider than the Worth Brothers’ mill. The middle roll had a
diameter of 21 inches. The wider mill increased the plant’s capacity from 60,000 tons per year to 100,000
tons, and once again it was proclaimed the largest plate mill in the country.
In addition to widening the existing three high mill, plans were
developed to add another new plate mill to roll even wider and
thicker plates. Construction was started in 1901, and a new three
high 140” wide mill began operations on June 2, 1903. The new
mill, built by the A. Garrison Foundry in Pittsburgh, had two
rolls 38” in diameter and a middle roll that was 22” in diameter
(Figure 10). The middle roll was shifted from the lower to the
upper position by two hydraulic cylinders located in a pit
beneath the mill. The top and bottom rolls were driven by a
2,250 hp Corliss non-condensing steam engine with a flywheel.
The engine was connected to the mill rolls by 18” diameter
spindles.48
Building on the design concepts employed in the universal mill,
the new plate mill was designed with several goals in mind: to
completely eliminate manual labor in the rolling process; to keep
the plate moving continuously on tables or roller conveyors; and
to produce the largest, flattest plates available in the country. To
achieve these goals the mill was designed with ample roller
tables, a roller leveler, a large cooling bed, and large trimming
shears. The layout of the mill is shown in Figure 11.
Figure 10. 140” Garrison Three High Mill
Ingots were broken down on the slabbing mill and heated in three continuous heating furnaces that measured
9 feet wide by 50 feet long. Ingots that rolled direct to plates were heated in two large 4-hole pit furnaces.
An electric overhead crane removed the heated material from the furnaces and placed it on an ingot transfer
car, which conveyed it to the 54 foot long approach tables. Dual drives were used with tapered rolls in the
tilting tables on both sides of the mill to turn the piece for cross rolling to width. After rolling, the plate was
flattened on a 9 roll leveler that had 14” diameter rolls. The plates were cooled on a chain-type bed 110’
long and 90’ wide. Hydraulically operated arms tilted the plate to allow inspection of the bottom surface.48
A set of table rolls received the plate at the end of the cooling bed, where they were laid out for shearing.
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
13
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
Mill
Reheat Furnaces and Pits
Engine
Cooling Bed
Figure 11. Layout of the 140” Three High Mill
The cooling bed and lay out area provided 11,000 ft2 of plate cooling area. The rolls moved the plates to a
12’ end cut shear for trimming to length. Two additional 12’ guillotine shears located in the shearing bay
were used for side trimming, along with smaller shears and circle cutters to provide blanks for the flanging
department. The annual capacity of the new 140” mill was 200,000 net tons per year, giving Lukens a total
plant capacity of 380,000 net tons – almost double the output of the neighboring Worth Brothers mill.49
With the large width capacity of the new mill and the mechanical equipment to handle heavy plates, the
importance of the 134” three high mill was somewhat diminished, and its role was subsequently changed. In
1904 the mill was rebuilt once again. The rolls were reduced in size to 112” long while maintaining the 36”
diameter rolls. The large diameter rolls allowed thin gauge, wide plates to be rolled with minimal thickness
variation across the width, resulting in very flat products.50
The 140” wide mill did not hold the title of the country’s largest plate mill for very long. While Lukens was
building its new 140” mill, the owners of the neighboring Worth Brothers plant were busy planning its next
move in the battle for the widest rolling mill. Just two months after the Huston brothers began rolling on
their new mill, the Worth Brothers commissioned a new 152” wide plate mill.45 Their new three high mill
had 42” diameter rolls for increased stiffness. The new mill was hailed as the country’s widest, and once
again the title had been passed from one neighbor to the other.
The World’s Largest Plate Mill
In 1918 Lukens Iron and Steel Company
established another first in the plate industry
when the company installed the first four high
plate mill in the world (Figure 12). The new
mill was 17’ wide, or a full 204”, exceeding
the European mills by a wide margin. These
included the 178” mill of the Witkowitz works
in Austria and the 168” two high mills in
Britain. It also surpassed the two largest
domestic rolling mills, which were the 152”
mills of the Worth Brothers’ works in
Coatesville and the Otis Steel Company in
Cleveland. The new mill rolled its first plate
on May 22, 1918.
The company’s original plans were to build a
180” three high mill to reclaim the title of the
widest plate mill in the world. However, none
of the roll manufacturers could produce the
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
Figure 12. A large plate is rolled on the United 206” Mill
14
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
required size and weight of the 50” diameter chilled rolls necessary for the mill. An alternate two high
design was considered, but the roll deflection would have resulted in excessive plate crown and precluded the
production of thin plates with a uniform thickness profile. Engineers on the Lukens staff began collaborating
in 1915 with the United Engineering & Foundry Co. (UE&F) of Pittsburgh on an idea to support the smaller
work rolls of a two high mill with cast steel rolls in order to stiffen the mill. UE&F designed the mill with
34” diameter work rolls, each weighing 30 tons, and 50” backup rolls that weighed 60 tons each.51 The
weight of the bottom backup roll was so great that it was feared that friction alone from the bottom work roll
would not turn the backup when the mill was not rolling. A third spindle connected with a friction clutch
was installed between the pinion stand and the bottom backup roll.
The dimensions of the mill housing, almost 40 feet in height, also exceeded the size and weight that could be
cast or machined in one piece. The steel housing was designed as a four part fabrication – two side posts
connected by a top bridge piece that contained the screw box and a bottom bridge piece containing the seat
for the bottom roll. The rolls were driven by a 20,000 hp twin tandem compound steam engine built by the
Mesta Machine Co. of Pittsburgh. Steam was provided by waste heat boilers in the open hearth melt shop
and the reheating furnaces.52
Several other special features were also designed for this unique mill. The work rolls were changed with the
help of a buggy that was inserted into the housing below the bottom work roll, after the work rolls were lifted
by the top roll balancing cylinder. The buggy removed the rolls, which could then be lifted by the overhead
crane. Ample table rolls were installed to receive ingots and slabs from the soaking pits or transferred from
the 140” mill and transport them to the mill rolls. A hydraulic ingot tilter rotated heavy ingots from the
vertical position to lay horizontally on the tables in a controlled fashion without damaging the table rolls.
Runout tables on the mill delivery side moved the plates to a mammoth set of electrically powered
straightening rolls built by Hilles & Jones of Wilmington Delaware.52
Plates left the straightener and cooled on a massive chain driven cooling bed measuring 180’ long and 90’
wide, which provided over 16,000 square feet of cooling space.48 The bed was divided into three separate
sections to handle plates up to 35’ long, 70’ long, or up to 90’ long. A tilting device with hydraulic cylinders
was included in the cooling bed for bottom inspection of plates up to 192” wide. After crossing the cooling
bed, the plates moved onto the shear runout tables, located in the shearing building. Here the plates were
transported on roller tables to the end cut shear. The hydraulically operated shear had a 210” wide opening,
large enough to accommodate the widest plate rolled.52 Side shears, also 210” in length, trimmed the plate to
the ordered width. Specially designed tables were installed between the end cut and side shears to handle the
extreme dimensions of the long and wide plates coming from the mill. Prior to the design of these tables,
caster rollers were used to manually move plates around in front of the shears. Another set of transfer chains
moved the cut plate into the shipping building for weighing and loading.
The large expanses of approach tables, runout tables, cooling beds, shear tables, and transfer tables
eliminated the manual labor previously required to move plates in the mill area and around the shears.
Mechanical movements allowed wider, longer, and heavier plates to be produced. The heaviest plate that the
140” three high mill could handle was 25,000 pounds.53 That limit was more than tripled, as the 204” mill
was designed to handle ingots weighing up to 90,000 pounds.54 The mill was widened to 206” in 1919.
A New 84” Tandem Mill
The old 84” steam powered non reversing mill was replaced in 1927 with a modern electric powered 84”
tandem mill. This was the first new mill installed with an electric motor. However, experience with motor
driven rolls was gained in 1925 when the 112” mill was electrified.55 The old Corliss steam engine installed
with the mill in 1890 was replaced by a Westinghouse 3,750 hp electric motor, operating at 2200 volts and
500 rpm. The electric motor developed an operating torque of 39,300 foot pounds and a maximum torque of
98,250 foot pounds.48
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
15
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
The new facility was installed in the building that originally housed the 34”x108” slabbing mill built in 1901.
The layout included an 84” two high roughing stand with 34” diameter rolls, and an 84” four high finishing
stand. The work rolls in the finishing mill were 23” diameter and the backup rolls were 40” diameter. The
layout of the mill, conceived jointly by United Engineering and Lukens, was designed to remove slabs from
the heating furnaces and continuously move them through the rolling process until they were ready for
shipment. To accomplish this goal, the mill was filled with transfer tables, conveyors, cooling beds, shears
and auxiliary equipment, which minimized the storage space required to hold in-process material. The mill
was designed to produce light gauge plates down to 1/8” thick and up to 72” wide, in lengths up to 420
inches, with weights as light as 1,000 pounds, or up to two tons.56
Slabs were heated in two furnaces measuring 15’ by 9’ that had a capacity of only 4 ½ tons per hour,
permitting the rolling of about 10 slabs per hour. The furnace doors were electrically controlled from the
crane operators cab, eliminating the job of the doorman.
The mills were also designed with several new features never installed on prior mills. Both the roughing and
finishing stands were equipped with differential screwdown control to allow the operator to level the mill.
They also had a quick roll changing rig to change rolls faster and safer. The four high mill had 40” diameter
back up rolls equipped with roller bearings instead of bronze bearings – a first for plate mills. The roller
bearings “promise to have far reaching advantages in that they are expected to reduce greatly the power
required for rolling and to eliminate the heat caused by neck friction where bronze bearings are used.”57 A
General Electric motor drove each mill through a pinion stand, utilizing the largest flexible couplings ever
built.
Plates left the mill after rolling, were taken
across a transfer bed, and flattened on a 17 roll
roller leveler built by the R.S. Newbold & Son
Co. of Norristown. The plate traveled down a
long cooling conveyor to an inspection
turnover, and was then transferred to roller
tables that conveyed the plate back toward the
mill. The sides of the plates were trimmed to
width using newly designed rotary side
trimmers developed by United (Figure 13).
The side scrap was cut into “short charging
box lengths” for the open hearth furnaces. A
Newbold end shear cut the pattern to length
using specially designed gauge which
Figure 13. Rotary Side Trimming Shears in the 84” Tandem Mill
eliminated manual layout of the plate. Scrap
from both shears was taken by conveyor to
charging boxes outside of the building. The plate, cut to ordered size, was moved across a third transfer bed
into the shipping bay.
An annealing furnace was installed in line, after the first transfer bed, to heat treat plates directly from the
mill. The continuous furnace was provided for the production of blue annealed or deep drawing stock, and
measured 8 foot wide by 40 foot long. The furnace used newly designed alloy rolls that could operate at
1900 oF, and did not require water cooling. Each roll had four disks that prevented the plate from contacting
the roll shaft, and promoted uniform heating of the bottom surface. The roll bearings were placed outside of
the furnace to prevent overheating. Upon exiting the furnace, the plates moved through the leveler, down the
cooling tables, and was processed in the manner described above.
With the installation of the new 84” tandem plate mill, Lukens was now operating five mills; the 84” tandem
plate mill, the 206” four high steam mill, the 140” three high steam mill, the 48” three high universal steam
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
16
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
mill, and the 112” three high motor driven mill. Each one of the rolling mills was equipped with a roller
leveler to flatten the plates before they had a chance to cool.55, 57
A New Mill for the War Effort
The 84” mill provided excellent capability for the
production of light gauge plates up to 72” wide, but the
outbreak of the Second World War suddenly created an
enormous demand for wider plates. The 120 inch four
high plate mill was built during World War II to roll
light gauge wide plates for navy ships (Figure 14). The
mill was financed by the United States Navy and placed
into operation in October, 1943. It was built around the
existing 112 in. mill in a layout that utilized the old three
high as a roughing mill. The new mill had 36” diameter
work rolls that were supported by 54” diameter back up
rolls. The rolls were powered by a 7,000 hp electric DC
motor. At the time of the mill’s construction, there were
five four high plate mills in the country, and Lukens had
three of them – the original 206” mill, the 84” finishing
mill, and the new 120” mill.58
Figure 14. 120” United Four High Mill
A unique feature of the new mill was automatic control of the mill screws, edger position and sideguards.
Under this control, the rolling schedule was set up on a switchboard by plugging cords into holes marked
with the desired mill opening. It was possible to set up a rolling schedule with as many as 21 passes on the
board. Two complete sets of plugs allowed one schedule to be set up while the other was being rolled.
Changing from one schedule to the other only required the screwman to operate a small desk mounted pistol
grip control switch.48
The layout of the mill followed the same general plan as the 84” mill, with the goal to remove ingots or slabs
from the heating furnaces or pits, place the piece on table rolls, and not handle the piece until it was rolled,
cut to size, leveled, marked, inspected and ready to ship. The main difference was a large increase in the
scale of the facilities, designed to handle a much greater flow of plates. The mill featured a continuous
production line that was more than 2,000 feet long, from the mill approach tables to the final shear tables.59
The capacity of the new rolling mill was 300,000 tons per year, and complemented the 360,000 tons of the
140/206 mill complex, which transitioned to a focus on heavier gauge plates. Eventually the large cooling
beds and massive shears in the bigger mills were removed to make room for gas cutting facilities. The
development of flame cutting enabled the trimming of plates thicker than 2” - gauges that could not be
sheared with even the largest equipment.
The steam driven universal mill and the motor driven 84” tandem mill, each with a capacity of 84,000 tons
per year, gave the plant a total capacity of 828,000 tons per year. The modern 120” mill replicated much of
the capabilities of the older 84” tandem mill, and led to the decommissioning of the 84” mill in January,
1945. The shutdown of the universal mill soon followed, after nearly 50 years of operation. It produced
light gauge, wide, long plates for beams, a market that could be supplied directly by beam mills. Rolled
beams were final products, and did not need welding like beams made from universal plates. The remaining
mills were upgraded as needed. The 140” mill was converted from steam to electric after World War II. The
2,250 hp steam engine was replaced with a single 4,000 hp DC motor. The 206” mill was electrified in
April, 1950, with the installation of two 4,000 hp DC motors.60
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
17
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
A Slabbing Mill for Alloy Ingots
The original slabbing mill built in 1901 was shut down and replaced by the 84” tandem plate mill in 1927.
After the closing of the slabbing mill, ingots were usually rolled direct to plate, avoiding the intermediate
steps of slabbing, conditioning, trimming and reheating. A range of ingots weighing from 1,000 pounds to
over sixty seven tons were used to supply the large spectrum of plates rolled in the 112/120 mill or the
140/206 complex.56
During the Korean War the nation geared up to produce armor plate at levels that had not been seen since
World War II. The alloy ingots proved difficult to roll direct, and the 206 four high mill was used to slab
ingots because of its ability to handle larger piece weights than the 140 three high mill. As Lukens
transitioned from a supplier of high quality carbon steel to a producer of alloy plate, slabbing on the 206 mill
increased from 10% of available production time to 40%.53 Valuable capacity for producing finished plate
tonnage was lost.
A new four high combination roughing and
slabbing mill (Figure 15) was installed in
1959 to relieve the load on the 206 mill and
increase finished plate tonnage. Ingots could
be slabbed on the new Mesta 140” mill and
conditioned, or could be broken down and
transferred directly to the 206” mill. Ingots
could also be rolled directly to heavy gauge
plates. The mill could handle ingots weighing
up to 60,000 pounds, compared to the 25,000
pound limit of the 140” three high mill. The
mill rolled its first ingot in April 1959.
The new mill had the largest housings in
North America, rated at 6,000 tons of
separating force. The 39” diameter work rolls
were each driven by a 5,000 hp DC motor, and
supported by 59 ¼” diameter backup rolls.
Load cells provided protection from force
Figure 15. 140” Mesta Four High and Vertical Edging Mill
overloads. A powerful detached edging stand
was equipped with vertical rolls 37 ¼” in diameter that were driven by a single 3,000 hp DC motor. The
vertical mill was designed to produce uniform width on ingots, reduce edge cracking on alloy material, and
break up surface scale during edging. Additional heating capacity was provided by 12 new soaking pits,
each rated at 200 tons each, and serviced by a 75 ton stiff leg crane.
The old 140” three high mill operated for several years after the new mill came online. Eventually it was
shut down after more than 60 years of operation. In 1967 the 140” four high mill was expanded to serve as a
finishing mill, and a hot leveler, a heavy gauge walking beam cooling bed, a dividing shear, and two light
gauge cooling beds were installed. Three additional soaking pits were also added.
Today the 140” mill is the workhorse of the Coatesville facility. The 206” mill still operates, 92 years after
rolling its first plate. It is pressed into service whenever a customer requires extremely wide or heavy plates
that cannot be made on any other mill in North America.
In 1979 the 110” mill of the former Alan Wood Steel Company in Conshohocken Pennsylvania was
purchased. The facility was revamped and restarted in 1980. This mill included a four high reversing
roughing mill and a four high non-reversing stand. During the economic downturn that occurred in the steel
industry in the mid 1980’s, the 112/120 mill complex was shut down. The mills sat idle for more than eight
years. The 120 mill housings were removed in 1994 and refurbished for the Steckel Mill project at the
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
18
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
Conshohocken plant. The 110” non-reversing
mill was removed and replaced with the 120”
housings, which were fitted with coiling
furnaces, and the reborn mill rolled its first coil
on August 22, 1995. Its former partner, the 112”
three high mill, has managed to survive - 120
years after rolling its first plate on the
company’s 80th anniversary (Figure 16). It still
stands as a symbol of the rolling heritage that
grew and matured along the flowing waters of
the Brandywine.
Summary
Two centuries have passed since the Brandywine
Iron Works and Nail Factory first opened its
head race and let the power of the Brandywine
turn the water wheel that rolled the first iron in
Coatesville. Water power was replaced by
steam, and then by electricity as rolling mills
grew in size and complexity.
Figure 16. The 112” Birdsboro Three High Mill Today
The journey from 1810 to 2010 has covered two hundred years – through periods of war and peace, panic
and prosperity, expansion and innovation. It is a remarkable achievement for one plant to have survived and
prospered, while others who joined the journey withered and became footnotes in the recording of its history.
It is a story of remarkable men and women, of prudent and conservative decisions made when the business
climate warranted, and of visionary and risky investments that propelled the company to a leadership
position in the plate industry. Many innovations in rolling were introduced in the mills of Coatesville,
including the first boiler plate rolled in America, the largest plate mills in the country, and then the world, the
first four high plate mill in the world, the first differential screw down, the first roller bearings for backup
rolls, the first rotary side shears, and several ground breaking designs in quick work roll changing, roller
levelers, shears, transfer and cooling beds, and inspection turnovers.
The story continues today – the ending not yet written. New chapters will be added, and new plots will
emerge. But one theme will remain true to the legacy of the founders - the rolling of quality plate on the
banks of the Brandywine in the rolling hills of southeastern Pennsylvania by men and women dedicated to
the industry.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank Scott Huston, a direct descendent of Rebecca Lukens and President of the
Graystone Society, and Eugene DiOrio, Vice President, for their insight and background into the rich history
of Lukens Steel. The Graystone Society is dedicated to preserving the heritage and history of the City of
Coatesville. I would also like to thank Al Brown for his valuable research into many aspects of the 19th
century history of the Coatesville area. Finally, I thank my wife Patti for her patience, understanding, and
assistance in preparing the manuscript.
References
1. Introduction to a History of Ironmaking and Coal Mining In Pennsylvania, Swank, James, Published
by the author, printed by Allen, Lane and Scott, Philadelphia, 1878 page 98.
2. Lukens 1810-1985, Remarkable Past – Promising Future, DiOrio, Eugene L., Lukens, 1985.
3. Introduction to a History of Ironmaking and Coal Mining In Pennsylvania, Swank, James, Published
by the author, printed by Allen, Lane and Scott, Philadelphia, 1878 page 99.
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
19
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
4. The Tariff Text Book, Young, Andrew W., 1860, page 49.
5. A Statement of the Arts and Manufactures of the United States of America for the Year 1810, Coxe,
Tench, A. Cornman, Philadelphia, 1814.
6. The First Rolling Mill in America, Harrison, William H., Transactions of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers Vol. II, New York, 1881, 103-105.
7. Pennsylvania Iron Manufacture in the Eighteenth Century, Second Edition, Bining, Arthur Cecil,
Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, 1973.
8. Industrial History of the United States, Franklin Press, Rand, Avery, & Co., Boston, 1878, page 196.
9. Forges and Furnaces in the Province of Pennsylvania, prepared by the Committee on Historical
Research, Philadelphia, 1914, page 96.
10. The Encyclopedia Americana, 1919, The Encyclopedia Americana Corporation, New York, page 372.
11. Notes on the Ancestry of the Children of Joseph Smith Harris and Della Sillman Brodhead,
Philadelphia, 1907, page 39.
12. History of Thornbury Township, PA, Chapter 2, http://www.thornbury.org/comp2
13. Harrison, page 104.
14. Harrison, page 103.
15. The development of American Industries Since Columbus, Chapter I, Early Steps in Iron Making,
Durfee, William F., printed in The Popular Science Monthly, December 1890, 314 - 338.
16. The Language of Work, Johnson, Carol Siri, Baywood Publishing Co., Amityville, NY, 2009, page 39.
17. Johnson, page 39.
18. Johnson, page 41.
19. A Concise History of the Iron Manufacture of the American Colonies up to the Revolution, and of
Pennsylvania until the Present Time, Pearse, John B., Allen, Lane & Scott, Philadelphia, 1876, page
181.
20. DiOrio.
21. Johnson, page 42.
22. The Family and Business Leadership of Rebecca Lukens, Judith Scheffler, West Chester University,
Pennsylvania Historical Association, Pennsylvania History, Vol. 66 No. 3, Summer 1999.
23. The Iron Manufacturer’s Guide to Furnaces, Forges and Rolling Mills of the United States, Lesley, J.
Peter, American Iron Association, John Wiley, New York, 1859.
24. The Iron History of Chester County, Huston, Stewart, Southeastern Pennsylvania, Chapter VI, Nolan,
J. Bennett, ed., Volume I, Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Philadelphia and New York, 1943.
25. Louis A. Holton, The Coatesville Record, March 30, 1928.
26. Journal of the Franklin Institute, Jones, Thomas P., Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, 1846 Journal of the
Franklin Institute, Jones, Thomas P., Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, 1846.
27. DiOrio.
28. Lukens, 1850 – 1870; A Case Study in the Mid-Nineteenth Century American Iron Industry, Skaggs,
Julian Callison, Dissertation, University of Delaware, June, 1975, page 58.
29. Skaggs, page 19.
30. DiOrio.
31. A Century and a Quarter in Iron and Steel, The Iron Age, July 4, 1935, page 47.
32. Skaggs, pages 45-46.
33. Johnson, page 47; Skaggs, page 131.
34. Skaggs, 182 - 187
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
20
Richard P. Smith, Jr.
35. Skaggs, page 114.
36. Industrial History of the United States, Franklin Press, Rand, Avery, & Co., Boston, 1878, page 600.
37. Biographical Notice of John Fritz, Raymond, Rossiter W. and Drinker, Henry Sturgis, AIME Trans
Vol. 47, 1913.
38. Steel and Iron, Greenwood, W. H., Cassell & Company, London, 1884, page 334.
39. Directory to the Iron & Steel Works of the United States, American Iron and Steel Association,
Philadelphia, 1880.
40. Directory to the Iron & Steel Works of the United States, American Iron and Steel Association,
Philadelphia, 1882.
41. The Village Record, May 19, 1865.
42. History of Chester County, Pennsylvania, Futhey, J. Smith & Cope, Gilbert, Philadelphia, L. H. Everts,
1881.
43. Directory to the Iron & Steel Works of the United States, American Iron and Steel Association,
Philadelphia, 1884.
44. Directory to the Iron & Steel Works of the United States, American Iron and Steel Association,
Philadelphia, 1890.
45. Directory to the Iron & Steel Works of the United States, American Iron and Steel Association,
Philadelphia, 1908.
46. United States Patent Office, Plate Straightening Machine, Letters Patent No. 712,300, dated October
28, 1902.
47. American Industrial Conditions and Competition, Report of the British Iron Trade Association, Jeans,
J. Stephen, London, 1903, page 137.
48. Lukens - Pioneer in Steel Plates and Plate Products, Ess, T. J., and Madsen, T. E., Iron and Steel
Engineer, May 1946, page 26-L.
49. Directory to the Iron & Steel Works of the United States, American Iron and Steel Association,
Philadelphia, 1904.
50. World’s Largest Plate Mill, Lukens Steel Company, 1924, page 11.
51. Brief History of the Plate Mill, Soderberg, A. W., United Effort, August, 1941, 9-14.
52. Builds World’s Largest Plate Mill, The Iron Trade Review, November 23, 1916, 1041-1045, 10551056.
53. Features of Lukens’ Roughing and Slabbing Mill, Operations, Reilly, William J., Iron and Steel
Engineer Year Book, 1963, 256-263.
54. The Iron Age, July 4, 1935, page 50.
55. The Iron Age, July 4, 1935, page 133.
56. Plate Rolling Practices, Bunting, Louis, and Watson, T. T., Iron and Steel Engineer Year Book, 1944,
231-234, 243-245.
57. Tandem Mill for Wide, Thin Plates, The Iron Age, May 19. 1927, 1431-1434.
58. The Modern Plate Mill, Ess, T. J., Iron and Steel Engineer Year Book, 1944, 202-205.
59. Lukens Annual Report, 1947, page 26.
60. Lukens Annual Report, 1950, page 8
200 Years of Rolling on the Brandywine
21
Richard P. Smith, Jr.